Why prohibit gay marriage?

Page Tools

Although gay marriage is not recognised in Australia, Prime Minister John Howard says he is concerned it might be one day if the courts interpret marriage as something other than a commitment between a man and a woman. To prevent this happening he wants to pass a bill banning gay marriage.

Last week Labor agreed to the legislation, which could not become law without the party's support. By way of explanation, shadow attorney-general Nicola Roxon said: "We understand how strongly many people feel about retaining and promoting the institution of marriage between men and women and as a bedrock institution for families."

But she did not say how a ban on gay marriage would serve to strengthen traditional marriage. After all, when a heterosexual marriage fails - and they do fail with distressing frequency - it is not usually because gay people wish to make a lifelong commitment to one another.

In recent times homosexual relationships have enjoyed greater recognition under the law and by society. Discriminatory laws governing inheritance, medical treatment and next of kin issues have been rightly eliminated by the Victorian Government, with adoption remaining one important exception.

AdvertisementAdvertisement

In May, the Federal Government expanded eligibility rules for tax-free superannuation death benefits to include "interdependent" relationships, although only last year it refused to give gay couples the same superuannuation rights as heterosexual couples.

But these legal adjustments, which reflect a greater acceptance of homosexuality in the community generally, have increased anxiety in some quarters about the enhanced status of homosexuals.

Last November, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that the state's ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional. This prompted a pledge by US President George Bush, who said he would "do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage".

Sanctity is a word with religious connotations, and it is the traditional religious discomfort with homosexuality that has largely fuelled moves to ban gay marriage.

But as the debate over the ordination of gay priests has demonstrated, views about homosexuality within the world's churches are hardly uniform. It can be argued that banning gay marriage undermines family values because it denies the ultimate expression of commitment to homosexual couples.

Certainly the ban will fan intolerance, and that is a most potent reason for not proceeding with it. If the Parliament must vote on the issue (and there appears to be no pressing reason for the legislation) it would best be decided by conscience vote rather than by party directive.

It appears Labor may have agreed to the ban in order to neutralise it as an issue before the election. If so, this is cynical politics that weakens the society our parliamentarians are meant to serve.